"Who likes fucking with some of the softies here" sounds to me like a generalized group of people have weak minds and are being played with, which could understandably bother said people.
"(…) you must be (…) incapable of becoming emotionally attached to an extended plot-device for a character" sounds to me like people are foolishly investing their emotions to entities that don't exist and do a pathetic job at pretending to be people. While it can be true in some cases, it sounds rude nonetheless.
I never stated my comment about people calling me a "sociopath" was directed at you. I tend to choose my words very carefully when It comes … moreto things like this, which may be why people may misconstrue my opinions for condescension. I never stated others were wrong and I never said my opinions were the only right way to view a tightrope topic like this.
What I'd like to know is which part in particular sounded condescending to you?
This up here. I just went through the four pages and didn't find a single insult other that "you're like Carver." Honestly didn't even stumb… morele upon "sociopathic."
I wrote down a few comments that will hopefully ignite some more civilized discussion.
No I'm saying that the way we are debating is showing the age differences.
Like I am not attacking anyone's personal character. That's ju… morest the college kid in me. I'd have to assume they are younger since they are acting immaturely In a debate.
That's not wrong, right?
The game has to be kept realistic to the world of The Walking Dead, where people are going to get pregnant, like Rebecca, and babies pop up.… more He wasn't there to fulfill a specific character role. And he can still be utilized in many ways. He doesn't have a purpose just yet, but that doesn't mean that he's a failure of a character.
She didn't toss him aside and leave him upside-down with his head into the snow. I will give you that it was extremely risky to leave him alone, but little details like Jane placing him inside a car instead of the first place she came across, and taking the time to make sure that the door window was slightly open for AJ to get a constant supply of oxygen, show us that she cared for him, at least partly.
Jane may not have ditched them, but she certainty didn't care for AJ. She did have some form of attachment and care for Clementine which I c… morean't deny, but with AJ, she obviously didn't feel much towards if she was willing to risk his life simply to enrage Kenny, thus proving her point and gaining an opportunity to kill Kenny.
That's reasonable, and seems like it will be done. I mean Clem obviously won't be caring for AJ throughout the entire Season. Perhaps we'll leave him with Javier's group.
◾"Who likes fucking with some of the softies here"
The entire quote was a bit more contextualized...
Also, I'm a cruel asshole who likes fucking with some of the softies here that think just cause you don't like a baby in a game, you must be evil or at least incapable of becoming emotionally attached to an extended plot-device for a character whose jumped through all his hoops more than enough times for it to be old-hat.
I had tried defusing my later argument with one that'd give off a bit more neutrality by calling myself an asshole, trying to establish a fair warning for those who may be put off by my later statements. Still never stated my opinion was the only correct one or that others' were wrong. Just that people get too heated over a video game character. Seems more than called for.
And I never meant to sound rude, I was under the impression I was just coming off more stern. But perspective is important, everyone has their own and I will concede I can come off a bit strong with some of my wording at times.
To each their own though. Some want AJ to live and continue through the story, I do not.
Some small bits, like…
* "Who likes fucking with some of the softies here" sounds to me like a generalized group of people have weak mi… morends and are being played with, which could understandably bother said people.
* "(…) you must be (…) incapable of becoming emotionally attached to an extended plot-device for a character" sounds to me like people are foolishly investing their emotions to entities that don't exist and do a pathetic job at pretending to be people. While it can be true in some cases, it sounds rude nonetheless.
That's it. I hope that this can be of use.
Oh yes, I am aware that it was contextualized, and that's why I had quoted the entire paragraph beforehand. You did ask for parts in particular though, so I selected what stood out to me.
And I've understood that you didn't say your opinion is the only valid one. I want to make clear that I am not asking for justification every time I reply.
◾"Who likes fucking with some of the softies here"
The entire quote was a bit more contextualized...
Also, I'm a cruel asshole… more who likes fucking with some of the softies here that think just cause you don't like a baby in a game, you must be evil or at least incapable of becoming emotionally attached to an extended plot-device for a character whose jumped through all his hoops more than enough times for it to be old-hat.
I had tried defusing my later argument with one that'd give off a bit more neutrality by calling myself an asshole, trying to establish a fair warning for those who may be put off by my later statements. Still never stated my opinion was the only correct one or that others' were wrong. Just that people get too heated over a video game character. Seems more than called for.
And I never meant to sound rude, I was under the impression I was just coming off more stern. But perspective is important, everyo… [view original content]
Jane placing him inside a car instead of the first place she came across, and taking the time to make sure that the door window was slightly open for AJ to get a constant supply of oxygen, show us that she cared for him, at least partly.
Well, Jane wasn't going to have him actually killed, knowing that Clementine, one of the few she has a bond towards, would most likely hate her afterwards if that was the case. I'll acknowledge that she did go to some extents to make sure the baby was somewhat comfortable, but her sheer recklessness and need to prove Kenny's instability shows that she cared more about her point than the actual life of a human being. What if Kenny successfully killed her? No one would know AJ's location and he would most certainty freeze to death, or worse. It's by complete chance that they hear the child crying if Clem allows Kenny to kill her. But Jane didn't care, so long as she could prove she was right and that Clementine was better off with her.
She didn't toss him aside and leave him upside-down with his head into the snow. I will give you that it was extremely risky to leave him al… moreone, but little details like Jane placing him inside a car instead of the first place she came across, and taking the time to make sure that the door window was slightly open for AJ to get a constant supply of oxygen, show us that she cared for him, at least partly.
I admit, laughed at your comment.
...but this thread, despite some hostility, didn't have as many insults as I thought I would have to remove. Still, consider this an open warning fellas.
Look i don't have all day to respond to stuff, but carver was clearly a ruthless tyrant and a murderer. If you want to defend that, whatever, but i think that says more than i need to.
That doesn't mean anything though—I also differ that @ShaneGrimes sounds like Carver. William Carver's principles seemed to be that the stro… moreng have the obligation to lead and protect the weak. I honestly believe that he killed Reggie so that the supplies that he would use could go to other residents of Howe's that were more "deserving" of them, and that doesn't seem like such a bad principle to run a community with. It's practical.
Reggie's murder being immoral is also debatable, since other people who worked "harder" could have more supplies, and perhaps survive longer, which would, simultaneously, keep the community full of people going, and more people would be kept alive.
And Carver never said that he wanted the baby to die. He wanted the baby to be raised and be "one of the strong" to continue his community. Carver only said that he would kill Rebecca and the baby if they attempted to escape, but we see that he didn't, since he had… [view original content]
Look i don't have all day to respond to stuff, but carver was clearly a ruthless tyrant and a murderer. If you want to defend that, whatever, but i think that says more than i need to.
I've never gotten upset about it at all. I've found this to be an interesting discussion, but you seem to be taking it far too seriously. Yo… moreu're acting if AJ were to be a real, living breathing human being, which he isn't and making out anyone with a different view on him, is a nutter. I mean if you're this overly sensitive to people's opinions, you shouldn't even be on an internet forum.
I agree with some of this. If liabilities always die and get you killed for helping, why did Nick and Sarah die but AJ lives? They had way higher chances of living and did way more to contribute. I like AJ, love Nick and Sarah, but that's a weird message from Telltale. Not to mention the sheer weird vitriol Nick and especially Sarah got from people for having interesting flaws, to the point people wanted them dead/wrote them off as liabilities for having things like anxiety, depression etc. Just like Telltale sort of did. But AJ we're expected to adore in comparison
And I get that having a baby around that needs food and is loud isn't ideal in the ZA, but Clem seemed to do fine in the alone ending, and h… moree's also still with them when they reach Howe's or Wellington, meaning it couldn't have been that bad.
And therein lies one big reason I wouldn't mind seeing AJ gone. Not eaten by walkers, just out of the story. His survival relies on really stupid writing that makes a mockery of the entire struggle for survival the game and franchise is supposedly based around. Maybe I wouldn't be so annoyed if the entire defense for the treatment of Christa, Nick, and Sarah as characters wasn't basically, "lol brutal realism." To unceremoniously kill off or just write out the characters that were worth half a damn because of "realism", and create the entire moral argument that Nick and Sarah were liabilities to our survival, and even have Clementine go along with those sentiments to an extent... and then have th… [view original content]
I admit, laughed at your comment.
...but this thread, despite some hostility, didn't have as many insults as I thought I would have to remove. Still, consider this an open warning fellas.
You can sacrifice them to keep yourself alive if that's how you play. That's a survival choice. But to not feel bad about it is screwed up. They're people. Good people who would help Clem if she needed it
If I feel right not caring about full fledged ppl like Nick and Sarah... And if I felt OK letting them die or causing their death... Then wh… morey should it be any different for a baby?
Call it what you want, I'm just being consistent. Won't let diapers or googley eyes change my person.
Namely because calling a position out isn't the same as insulting people.
For future reference, is calling a position out for being morally deficient or sociopathic ok? As long as it's the position?
Also @BetterToSleep I completely agree that it would be ethically wrong to leave AJ. And I think they were confusing ethics with morals. There is a definite ethical compass but not an absolute moral compass.
Also, yeah it's definitely fucked up to leave AJ like you leave Norma. I'd feel bad about leaving a kid behind regardless, but I'd probably feel worse looking into that kids eyes everyday of the ZA knowing he has little to no chance.
So I'd go the Cersei route and try to end the suffering before it begins (When she tried to give Tommen Milk of the Poppy)
You can sacrifice them to keep yourself alive if that's how you play. That's a survival choice. But to not feel bad about it is screwed up. They're people. Good people who would help Clem if she needed it
But being told that someone needs help, that you are a sadist, and a baby murder advocate. That's one person I know but that's a lot of things to pile on. Makes a good point at least
I don't see babies as any special form of life yet. I see all life as precious (loopholes, am I right)
So talking about killing a baby is just as bad as talking about killing any human being in my opinion. I don't think it should be any different.
Granted I can understand how some of us took it far in our descriptions of what we'd do, myself included. But I'm thinking in the context of the story. like I'm actually in a zombie apocalypse, there's no baby formula around, barely any food, and zombies breathin down my neck.
When I talk about the story, I immerse myself. I don't find it right to kill AJ in any other circumstance. It'd be like how Cersei almost killed Tommen in season two when Stannis attacked Kings Landing. It's not about what's actually right or wrong, but it's me being overprotective and selfish.
Is it that sociopathic when it's in a story? Or does it just sound bad when you see it in real life? I feel like it just sounds bad cause it's actual people talking about either shooting the baby or leaving it.
And I'd like to point out that it's not like your sacrificing his heart for the North Grove. It's a quick and painless death. Or maybe I'm saying that because it's a fictional story and that's how it goes in that universe.
Can you blame them, though? Some people are literally saying that they would just let a baby die or kill it by themselves. Even if it is a z… moreombie apocalypse, it's still bloody wrong. I mean, why kill a baby? Just because it's a plot device? What the fuck. Video game or not, you don't just wish for a baby to die or even kill it.
This up here. I just went through the four pages and didn't find a single insult other that "you're like Carver." Honestly didn't even stumb… morele upon "sociopathic."
I wrote down a few comments that will hopefully ignite some more civilized discussion.
Can we all just agree that maybe Lee should've let Vernon take Clem with him on that boat? Or at least start talking about how shit out of luck Clem is?
Like what the hell is the opening sequence gonna be?
I find it funny that when people bitch about AJ they sound more like babies then he does.
I think people just don't want to deal with a baby character.
I think they are worried about A.j will become another clementine, but they are overlooking that clem started at 6, in my opinion I think it is a great idea to have a.j. in s3.
I wish there was an option to give him somewhere in any good group like the cabin group to take care of him then move on with some torturing adventure in za world
I'm surprised by what seems like the general attitude towards AJ as well. I don't think it's in Clementine's character to let AJ die, even if we have the choice of dialogue and action over her, she's still very much an individual character.
Comments
I just don't want a kid and want to give him to someone else and let them care for him.
Some small bits, like…
"Who likes fucking with some of the softies here" sounds to me like a generalized group of people have weak minds and are being played with, which could understandably bother said people.
"(…) you must be (…) incapable of becoming emotionally attached to an extended plot-device for a character" sounds to me like people are foolishly investing their emotions to entities that don't exist and do a pathetic job at pretending to be people. While it can be true in some cases, it sounds rude nonetheless.
That's it. I hope that this can be of use.
best insult ever
Yes attacking people is immature but i don't see that many people here doing it though
Curse you for making a smart civilized comment and proving me wrong!
I can't say I'm not curious what they're going to make out of him in S3.
She didn't toss him aside and leave him upside-down with his head into the snow. I will give you that it was extremely risky to leave him alone, but little details like Jane placing him inside a car instead of the first place she came across, and taking the time to make sure that the door window was slightly open for AJ to get a constant supply of oxygen, show us that she cared for him, at least partly.
That's reasonable, and seems like it will be done. I mean Clem obviously won't be caring for AJ throughout the entire Season. Perhaps we'll leave him with Javier's group.
It means that you have an ugly droopy mustache.
The entire quote was a bit more contextualized...
I had tried defusing my later argument with one that'd give off a bit more neutrality by calling myself an asshole, trying to establish a fair warning for those who may be put off by my later statements. Still never stated my opinion was the only correct one or that others' were wrong. Just that people get too heated over a video game character. Seems more than called for.
And I never meant to sound rude, I was under the impression I was just coming off more stern. But perspective is important, everyone has their own and I will concede I can come off a bit strong with some of my wording at times.
To each their own though. Some want AJ to live and continue through the story, I do not.
Oh yes, I am aware that it was contextualized, and that's why I had quoted the entire paragraph beforehand. You did ask for parts in particular though, so I selected what stood out to me.
And I've understood that you didn't say your opinion is the only valid one. I want to make clear that I am not asking for justification every time I reply.
Well, Jane wasn't going to have him actually killed, knowing that Clementine, one of the few she has a bond towards, would most likely hate her afterwards if that was the case. I'll acknowledge that she did go to some extents to make sure the baby was somewhat comfortable, but her sheer recklessness and need to prove Kenny's instability shows that she cared more about her point than the actual life of a human being. What if Kenny successfully killed her? No one would know AJ's location and he would most certainty freeze to death, or worse. It's by complete chance that they hear the child crying if Clem allows Kenny to kill her. But Jane didn't care, so long as she could prove she was right and that Clementine was better off with her.
Same I come back and there are 206 Comments. Wtf?
Namely because calling a position out isn't the same as insulting people.
For future reference, is calling a position out for being morally deficient or sociopathic ok? As long as it's the position?
Look i don't have all day to respond to stuff, but carver was clearly a ruthless tyrant and a murderer. If you want to defend that, whatever, but i think that says more than i need to.
I feel like you didn't even read my comment.
I can only go off what i read here.
You can only speak for yourself. People who don't hate babies won't hate them because the going gets tough
I agree with some of this. If liabilities always die and get you killed for helping, why did Nick and Sarah die but AJ lives? They had way higher chances of living and did way more to contribute. I like AJ, love Nick and Sarah, but that's a weird message from Telltale. Not to mention the sheer weird vitriol Nick and especially Sarah got from people for having interesting flaws, to the point people wanted them dead/wrote them off as liabilities for having things like anxiety, depression etc. Just like Telltale sort of did. But AJ we're expected to adore in comparison
Not enough insults? We'll have to change that. YOU ALL SMELL! (LOL)
You can sacrifice them to keep yourself alive if that's how you play. That's a survival choice. But to not feel bad about it is screwed up. They're people. Good people who would help Clem if she needed it
I mean, as long as you don't say they are morally deficient or sociopathic, you should be fine.
bcuz hurr durr plot device lululel im a master plot writer huehue
Hate babies? What?
Am I the only one who thinks that the Zombie Apocalpyse is hell and living in it is torture?
Yeah I know the feeling
Also @BetterToSleep I completely agree that it would be ethically wrong to leave AJ. And I think they were confusing ethics with morals. There is a definite ethical compass but not an absolute moral compass.
Also, yeah it's definitely fucked up to leave AJ like you leave Norma. I'd feel bad about leaving a kid behind regardless, but I'd probably feel worse looking into that kids eyes everyday of the ZA knowing he has little to no chance.
So I'd go the Cersei route and try to end the suffering before it begins (When she tried to give Tommen Milk of the Poppy)
Feeling bad is irrelevant. Never said I wouldn't feel bad.
Well you aren't, and I thank you.
But being told that someone needs help, that you are a sadist, and a baby murder advocate. That's one person I know but that's a lot of things to pile on. Makes a good point at least
I don't see babies as any special form of life yet. I see all life as precious (loopholes, am I right)
So talking about killing a baby is just as bad as talking about killing any human being in my opinion. I don't think it should be any different.
Granted I can understand how some of us took it far in our descriptions of what we'd do, myself included. But I'm thinking in the context of the story. like I'm actually in a zombie apocalypse, there's no baby formula around, barely any food, and zombies breathin down my neck.
When I talk about the story, I immerse myself. I don't find it right to kill AJ in any other circumstance. It'd be like how Cersei almost killed Tommen in season two when Stannis attacked Kings Landing. It's not about what's actually right or wrong, but it's me being overprotective and selfish.
Is it that sociopathic when it's in a story? Or does it just sound bad when you see it in real life? I feel like it just sounds bad cause it's actual people talking about either shooting the baby or leaving it.
And I'd like to point out that it's not like your sacrificing his heart for the North Grove. It's a quick and painless death. Or maybe I'm saying that because it's a fictional story and that's how it goes in that universe.
Definitely got called a sadist and a baby murder advocate.
But if it was edited, then I don't care. This needs to stay up.
LOOK WHAT YOUVE DONE TELLTALE. WE WERE ALL INNOCENT LIL CLEMS AND NOW WE ARE DEBATING MURDERING A BABY!!
Can we all just agree that maybe Lee should've let Vernon take Clem with him on that boat? Or at least start talking about how shit out of luck Clem is?
Like what the hell is the opening sequence gonna be?
And Judith got Rekt in the comics
Which is pretty understandable, when you're in a ZA
I think they are worried about A.j will become another clementine, but they are overlooking that clem started at 6, in my opinion I think it is a great idea to have a.j. in s3.
Or a baby murder advocate or a sadist... Don't forget those ones.
I don't hate aj i just dont like him having around in season 3 it's hard to raise an infant in zombie apocalypse imo
I wish there was an option to give him somewhere in any good group like the cabin group to take care of him then move on with some torturing adventure in za world
This.... Lee "Alvin"... whatever dat last name is.
I think it's impossible for a baby to survive in the winter with just a blanket.
I'm surprised by what seems like the general attitude towards AJ as well. I don't think it's in Clementine's character to let AJ die, even if we have the choice of dialogue and action over her, she's still very much an individual character.
Right? I'm sure that is the most powerful-anti-cold blanket.
But you did say "If I feel right not caring" Just looking for debate though, not arguing, it's interesting